Multi-classing in DH

By Surak, in Dark Heresy House Rules

Hi,

Not really sure if this should be here or in the GM forum but ah well.

As you may or may not know im a long-time GM and roleplayer in general as are most of my group. In one of our random pub-fueled debates the other week we started compareing various roleplay systems we have used - mainly DnD 3.5, DH/RT, and the Serenity/Cortex system - and a question came up that i've been chewing over and can't really decied one way or another so I thought id throw it out to the community.

Is there a sensible way to have a character using two careers at the same time in DH?

Now my group only throw stuff like this about because they know im willing to tinker, as was proven by converting both the cortex and DH rules to work in the Star Trek universe. But on this one id like the input of my fellow GM's and players.

Is there a place in DH for Scum-Assassins, Adept-Psykers, Guardsmen-Clerics?

Constructive comments always welcome.

Surak

The short answer, for me at least, is "elite advances."

Inquisitors Handbook introduced, to me at least, the idea of elite advance packages, like the Redemptionist, which not only give certain skills and/or talents but also give access to a special advance chart which a character can purchase from in addition to their regular advances.

I'm currently running a game centering on the Imperial Guard, however, none of the characters have the Guardsman career. Instead, they have an elite advance package which gives them access to key skills and talents from that career. I've work up notes for elite advance packages for all careers, allowing characters to essentially multi-class.

There are numerous ways:

1)Elite advances. Let the PC buy the skill or talent for the normal cost plus 100-200 additional XP.

2)Alternate career paths and/or elite advance packages. For example the Templar Calxis in the IH is basically a melee psyker.

3)Alternate starting packages and backgrounds. For example the reclaimer from IH is basically a tech-scum.

4)A lot of careers are branched. For example an adept psyker you can get there from either adept or psyker.

Get the IH, and RH for the largest selection of such things.

I think building a starting package is the beste solution to this. If you are talking "Psykers", I would be very very cautious about what this is to be mixed up with. To me, this instantly reeks of powergaming.

Besides, an easy way to generate SOME of the said "mixes" is to switch "starting package" (the skills, talents and equipment you get) between the careers. Want a priest from a front line unit? Take the "Cleric"-Career, but take the Guardsmen starting package. The starting xp are (of course) put into the cleric first rank.

An elite advance package or an alternate rank would be the best method. First decide what you want from the hybrid class you can look through the options in the various supplemental books or make your own one.

The other thing to consider is that the classes might already overlap enough to meet your goals. Lets take your example of a Adept-Psyker here. What would you expect from this hybrid class that you can't get via the scholar path in the psyker advance scheme ?

Thanks for the fast responces people,

knowing one or two of my gaming group this was an example of them looking to powergame, an on-going fight i have with them.

I do like the idea of mixing the starting packages up a little, and of course elite advances were the first thing that came to mind when I first looked at this.

To limit the amount of power-gaming potential I think I will limit them to elite advances rather then having access to complete careers (as they seem to want to do).

I'll let you know what we endup doing and post up anything relevant here.

Surak

Personally, aside from a couple of elite advances, and the one or two elite packages (like the N. Psyker), I don't think there should be much multiclassing at all.

If they aren't finding enough flexibility in the classes as is, then they are possibly playing the game wrong.

My (possibly not so) humble opinion.

The real question what are they looking for with the multi-class?

Scum-Assassins- These 2 are pretty close skill and talent wise. The major difference being the scum has more social skills while the assasin is better at melee. If it's just an Assassin wanting some social skill I say let him/her have it as elite advances. If they are trying to min/max talent just say no.

Adept-Psykers- The default psyker can easily be played as a scholar. The adept can get powers later in his career. If this just a psyker trying to play a book worm with a bunch of knowledge skills then go for it. If this is another talent min/max thing then no.

Guardsmen-Clerics- The Cleric is a social skill guy, while the guardsman is a gun bunny. There isn't a big over lap. I'd look up peace keeper's commissar career for more social guarsman type. On the other hand if a guardsman wants to just pickup a few social skills why not.

The real question is how big is your group. If it's only 3 people the players may simply be trying to fill all the roles. The role of an Adept or Cleric is hard be in small groups. Without the dedicated talents the fighting classes have your contribution to combat is really missed. As a GM I generally let PCs take any social skill, stealth skill*, or psychical skill. Also it's best to insure someone gets medicae. Like wise with knowledge based skill they need to be able to explain how they learned. This allows the PCs to break the mold a bit, and allows the PCs to take what ever class they want. If everyone wants to be a guardsman sure why not. What is important is that the PCs have broad range of skills allow the players to roleplay, and not just go from fight to fight.

In general my Inquisitors put the PCs through basic training after a mission or 2. Every accolyte knows how to climb, swim, sneak, hide, search, and maintain a cover story. There is always someone in the group with medical skill, and someone with security skills.

*Few thing are more than annoying games where half the PCs are about as stealthy as bull in a china shop.